Better review your History
Senator Clinton’s apparently told the Seattle Post Intelegencer that VP Cheney should have to undergo “anger management” course for uttering the “f-word” to Sen. Leahy last week.
Said Sen Clinton:
“So far as I know, no colleague has ever used profanity of that sort on the Senate floor,”–Source
Two problems with Sen Clinton’s quote:
First, Cheney’s utterance was not made while the Senate was in session; rather it was a “private” utterance (that was obviously overheard by others).
Second, I think there are times when more profanity may have been used on the floor of the Senate. The primere example would probably be when Preston Brooks beat Charles Sumner with a cane on the floor of the Senate:
Nearly 50 years before, a Massachusetts senator had been beaten unconscious, three days after he took to the floor to denounce two Democratic senators he believed to be pro-slavery. Illinois’s Stephen Douglas, Charles Sumner had said, was a “noise-some, squat and nameless animal.” He then accused South Carolina’s Andrew Butler of taking “a mistress . . . who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight. I mean,” he added, “the harlot, Slavery.” That brought House member Preston Brooks in to defend Butler, striking Sumner about the head so furiously with a cane that the senator was carried bloody and unconscious from the chamber.–WaPo
Read the rest of the WaPo article for other occurances.
I’m not trying to say that Cheney’s choice of words was correct, rather, that compared to other things in the Senate’s history, this is nothing.
First, Clinton’s comment never mentioned that the F-bomb was used during sessions, so why did you bring it up. Second, the other examples of bad behavior did not involve the VICE PRESIDENT. Not to mention from a VP from an administration that promised to bring honor back to the white house. But you’re right this isn’t a big deal…I’d much rather see the press focus on Leahy charges of Haliburton war profiteering…or the lies that Cheney is still spouting regarding the connection between Al-Quada and Iraq.
Comment by smrtr thn u — 7/1/2004 @ 10:29 am
creative name. You are right on the first point–I brought it up because most of the coverage of the story seems to imply that it was said on the floor, rather than a “private” conversation between two people.
Did I defend cheney’s actions, No. I said what he did was inappropriate, and in comparison to other things, this is really petty and minimal.
I don’t remember if this admin promised to bring honor back to the WH, cause at the time I was voting for the other guy (Gore).
As for the Leahy charges, the Halliburton thing has been examined and examined again–it’s rather boring by now. As for Cheney’s assertions, there’s Stephen Hayes’ recent book and other pieces of apparent evidence which have been found but were largely ignored by the mainstream media. I’m too tired to link to all the examples of the latter now though.
Comment by Jaws — 7/1/2004 @ 11:21 pm